NHL considering cancelling 2005 draft?

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Ann Arbor? Isn't that near Detroit? As I said, look who is against this. Sort of belies the argument that the big markets will be gutted with the new CBA and so they need an equal shot at a top pick doesn't it? I do not see the fans of the sad sack teams from 2003-4 complaining about this idea do you?

What's your point? Or are you just trying to show how smart you are by asking if Detroit is near Ann Arbor?

I really don't see how this is a big market/little market deal.

It's a workers rights issue to me.
If you're a legal adult with all the skills needed to do the job, then why shouldn't you have the right to work?

I grew up in Windsor, Ontario. My dad, my uncle, and my sister all work for the Big 3. My dad spent 12 years as a union steward and another 6 years as a union health and safety instructor.

I tend to view things more as worker/owner than I do big market/small market. Because, I actually do sympathize with those small market fans that actually support hockey far more than I sympathize with millionaire players or billionaire owners.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Why?

Because I believe that it's unfair to discrimate based on age.

18 appears to be the age (not decided by me) at which governments recognize people as adults.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Ummm, outside of Doogie Howser, should any adult be allowed to be accepted into the medical association as a doctor?

If the players and league agree that 19 is a better age due to the need for an extra years' development, then how does a person's desire to play before then supercede the collective will of the NHL and NHLPA?

If somehow, an 18 year old can complete his or her considerable training, then I suppose I wouldn't have a problem with it, although I'd be pretty leery of it if my health was at stake.

But we're not talking about life savers. We're talking about entertainers.

It matters little to me what the players and owners agree to. What matters to me is a person's right to work.

Closing the door on any adult based solely on their age should be illegal. One would have to make a very good argument to change my mind, and I haven't seen anything that approaches it.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Why is one arbitrary number worse than another?

Why have any limits on draft age? If a team wants to put Tavares into their lineups next year, why not let them draft him at 14?

Well, I'm not sure how that plays out. See, i you're under 18, you're not recognized as an adult, and you don't have the same legal rights as adults

 

[Timmy]

If somehow, an 18 year old can complete his or her considerable training, then I suppose I wouldn't have a problem with it, although I'd be pretty leery of it if my health was at stake.

But we're not talking about life savers. We're talking about entertainers.

It matters little to me what the players and owners agree to. What matters to me is a person's right to work.

Closing the door on any adult based solely on their age should be illegal. One would have to make a very good argument to change my mind, and I haven't seen anything that approaches it.

So, how young are we talking, here?

And I don't know the answer to this, but is an adult recognized unversally (ie US, Canada, all States and Provinces) as being 18?

 

[kdb209]

It's a workers rights issue to me.
If you're a legal adult with all the skills needed to do the job, then why shouldn't you have the right to work?

I grew up in Windsor, Ontario. My dad, my uncle, and my sister all work for the Big 3. My dad spent 12 years as a union steward and another 6 years as a union health and safety instructor.

I tend to view things more as worker/owner than I do big market/small market. Because, I actually do sympathize with those small market fans that actually support hockey far more than I sympathize with millionaire players or billionaire owners.

You may have the legal right to work, but you do not have a legal right to be employed by the employer of your choice.

It's funny that you come from a union backround, since unions are one of the biggest sources of restrictions of who can be hired and how - no union card, sorry, etc. It is frequently to the benefit of a union to artificially reduce the source of labor to support higher wages for current union members. In fact many of the legal precedents concerning the rights of an employer (or union) to legally place restrictions on hiring, to specify certain eligibility criteria for hiring, to assign workers to a certain employer (rather than letting them choose), actually came out of union practices - all union shops, mandatory apprenticeships, hiring halls, etc.

 

[mooseOAK*]

Really? that was all the buzz about Gomez playing in the ECHL and his eventual injury.

Seems that my memory had a lapse because I CAN'T remember the name of the guy that hit Gomez. Apparently, he has made that "name for himself."

Perfect example, thank you.

 

[Kritter471]

I still don't understand the huge benefit of waiting until draftees are in the NHL. Basketball and football age restrictions make sense for the sake of the players, as being involved in the draft (whether or not you are actually drafted) makes a huge difference on what the player's educations/employment options are in the future.

From a team standpoint, I maintain it's just as likely for a prospect to have a overly-bad/overly-good year at 19 as it is at 18.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

You may have the legal right to work, but you do not have a legal right to be employed by the employer of your choice.
.

Union rant snipped

No one has a right to choose who they work for. On the other hand, no one should be discriminated against either.

I mean, what if Future Shop or Best Buy said we won't hire anyone under the age of 27.

What if Denny's didn't hire black people?

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

So, how young are we talking, here?

And I don't know the answer to this, but is an adult recognized unversally (ie US, Canada, all States and Provinces) as being 18?

I don't know really, but I'd say that 18 is pretty standard.

I mean, I know a lot of people here really don't care much for players and their salaries.
But look at Sidney Crosby.
He can step into the league today and be a millionaire.

What if he gets into a car crash on his 19th birthday and never plays a game in the NHL?

Then the NHL (and the PA, if they agree to it) has robbed him of a chance to make a million dollars based on a discriminatory age rule.

I really don't see the need to change the draft process.
I'm not sure what the problem is with the current system. It's not like the NBA, where kids come out of high school and get $50 Million contracts.

 

[Timmy]

I don't know really, but I'd say that 18 is pretty standard.


.

You start talking lawsuits, and it better be set in stone and universal if you're basing a case on "the rights of an adult."


You will also have to overturn the precedent-setting case already established.

You will also have to convince a collectively-bargained-CBA-reading judge that the parties were wrong and that the CBA should be torn up because your 18 year old client (who will be 19 by the time the thing goes to trial) thinks he should play as soon as he's considered an adult.

 

[Master Shake*]

You start talking lawsuits, and it better be set in stone and universal if you're basing a case on "the rights of an adult."


You will also have to overturn the precedent-setting case already established.

You will also have to convince a collectively-bargained-CBA-reading judge that the parties were wrong and that the CBA should be torn up because your 18 year old client (who will be 19 by the time the thing goes to trial) thinks he should play as soon as he's considered an adult.

Maurice Clarett
http://www.voluntarytrade.org/newsite/modules/news/article.php?storyid=21

 

[Timmy]

Maurice Clarett
http://www.voluntarytrade.org/newsite/modules/news/article.php?storyid=21

Thanks MS.

From the link:

In a 35-page opinion, Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor said the three-year eligibility rule was exempt from the antitrust laws because player eligibility was a subject of collective bargaining with the NFL Players Association.

 

[misterjaggers]

NHL considering cancelling 2005 draft?

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/hearsay.jsp
I agree with the author of the article: this is an unlikely (and, in my opinion, undesirable) outcome.

 

[kdb209]

Union rant snipped

No one has a right to choose who they work for. On the other hand, no one should be discriminated against either.

I mean, what if Future Shop or Best Buy said we won't hire anyone under the age of 27.

What if Denny's didn't hire black people?

A negotiated CBA gives wide latitude for an employer/union to set eligibility requirements for hiring and generally provides an exemption from anti trust challenge. It does not provide an exemption from civil rights or other federal or state anti discrimination laws. A CBA could not be used as a blanket tool to discriminate on the basis of race or gender or any other specific classes identified under civil rights law. In cases of age discrimination, courts have generally ruled on age discrimination against older workers. I do not know of any age discrimination cases filed on the behalf of younger (18-21 yo) workers. It is unlikely that an age discrimination suit on the behalf of an 18-21 year old could prevail, given that the law itself recognizes differences and discriminates against that age group - drinking age, etc.

 

[NYR469]

while it will take most of the fun out of the offseason, this is by far the simplest and most fair way to deal with the draft...and IMO if crosby wasn't the #1 pick there wouldn't even be a discussion they would just do it, but they have had crosby's draft as a key point in drawing fans back...

for years they have talked about raising the draft age and this provides the PERFECT opportunity...when looking to raise the draft age by a year, it is so much easier if you can skip a full year vs gradually moving toward that age and having partial draft classes.

skip the draft and make the cutoff anyone that turns 18 by dec 31st of the previous year. so anyone board before 12/31/87 would be eligible for the 2006 draft (which puts crosby and kessel in the same draft)...then all players born in the same year get drafted together and everyone is atleast 18 years, 9 months when training camps open up.

the benefit is that it takes out some of the guess work and luck in drafting...look at how much rankings change 1 year after the draft. i once heard a scout say that trying to draft the best nhl player at age 18 is like trying to find the best doctor in a 6th grade science class...raising the draft age will reduce some of the risk and in theory should reduce the number of early round busts and having a better idea of who to pick will benefit all teams.

 

[NYR469]

What happens to an 18 yo. prospect? Is he now back in the draft?

the same thing that happens to 17 year old prospects now, they wait until next year when they are draft eligible.

 

[NYR469]

I would think there would be too many legal problems in just cancelling the draft.

The last thing the league needs is to be in court with some prospect who's pissed off with the cancellation of the draft.

there really would be no legal problems (although IMG will sue to make crosby a free agent, and most likely lose)...the rules for the draft is determined under the CBA, the old cba is expired so the rules under that cba is irrelevant. if the new cba says the draft age is 19 then it is 19.

the age is an arbitrary cutoff, but there is no god-given right to being drafted at age 18...in fact the draft age used to be 20.

in 2003, ovechkin missed the cutoff by 2 days...he had absolutely no legal standing to get entered into the draft because those were the rules...

this year, kessel missed the cutoff by a month and he has absolutely no legal standing to get entered into the draft because those are the rules...

so how would this be any different?? the cba rules say that crosby isn't eligible for the draft till 2006 then he isn't eligible till 2006 simple as that.

and this would be a big deal for guys expecting to get picked this year and next year, but after the first year or 2 it would be viewed as the 'normal age' and no one would think twice of it.

 

[SuperUnknown]

This is just a maneuver by Bettman to get his draft lottery approched (1 ball for each team + 1 ball for each playoffs missed in the last 3 years of operations). (no source, just my opinion)

 

[PecaFan]

Well, a bunch of us said months ago that the best thing to do was to raise the draft age, and I'll still stand by that. All benefits, no drawbacks. There are lots of fresh new stars entering the league, there's no "Crosby factor".

And if Crosby is as good as he's hyped up here, then I want some team to genuinely earn him by sucking royally.

 

[nyrmessier011]

Well, a bunch of us said months ago that the best thing to do was to raise the draft age, and I'll still stand by that. All benefits, no drawbacks. There are lots of fresh new stars entering the league, there's no "Crosby factor".

And if Crosby is as good as he's hyped up here, then I want some team to genuinely earn him by sucking royally.

or by 8 teams throwing the last 15 games of their seasons to get the best chance at him?? Use a freaking system that represents the last three to five years in the standings and give percentages out for the lottery that way. Having every team have an equal chance is stupid, but cancelling the draft as a whole is even stupidER

 

[Kritter471]

Pleeeeease somebody *whines*

What benefit does raising the draft age to 19 have (other than avoiding a potential rigged-lottery situation this year)? I'm not seeing it, but it's a common enough viewpoint that it must have some logic behind it.

 

[NYR469]

Pleeeeease somebody *whines*

What benefit does raising the draft age to 19 have (other than avoiding a potential rigged-lottery situation this year)? I'm not seeing it, but it's a common enough viewpoint that it must have some logic behind it.

the logic is simply this...teams don't trade players based on who the best 18 year old is, they drafted based on who they project will be the best nhl are 25 years old (ie in their prime).

well the closer the player gets to being nhl ready the easier it becomes to determine what he'll be like down the road. so its easier to determine the future of a 19 year old then an 18 year old because you have seen more and he is closer to the finished product.

there is no particular benefit to the player, that isn't the issue...but the benefit for the team is less risk involved in each pick

 

[The Old Master]

the benefit is that it takes out some of the guess work and luck in drafting...look at how much rankings change 1 year after the draft. i once heard a scout say that trying to draft the best nhl player at age 18 is like trying to find the best doctor in a 6th grade science class...raising the draft age will reduce some of the risk and in theory should reduce the number of early round busts and having a better idea of who to pick will benefit all teams.

foregetting about all the hype you'll lose this year, what you say is true. but i still like the chance of a star player dropping down so a higher ranked team could still steal a grate player [well there is hope, any way] with another year to scout them there would be less chance of that happening.

 

[DevilFisch]

the logic is simply this...teams don't trade players based on who the best 18 year old is, they drafted based on who they project will be the best nhl are 25 years old (ie in their prime).

well the closer the player gets to being nhl ready the easier it becomes to determine what he'll be like down the road. so its easier to determine the future of a 19 year old then an 18 year old because you have seen more and he is closer to the finished product.

there is no particular benefit to the player, that isn't the issue...but the benefit for the team is less risk involved in each pick

Well, true, but what's the point of requiring a player to have another year of development in major junior/college/Europe/etc. if the vast majority of 18 year olds remain with their clubs for at least another year or so? I can understand higher age limits in basketball and football where there aren't many opportunities to further develop a player outside of trying to fit in playing time on the pro club. I'm not so sure it's necessary in hockey. If this was already addressed, I apologize for being redundant.